The Mendocino County Board of Supervisors heard from staff and the public Tuesday on proposed changes to the county ordinance addressing regulations for limited density rural dwellings (Class K) including a proposal to require a three-year deed restriction to be recorded on parcels containing Class K structures, requiring wildland urban interface standards for all new single- family residences and requirements relating to fire sprinklers.

The supervisors provided staff with direction on the recommended amendments to the current ordinance in place since 1981.

Chief building official Michael Oliphant said the department finalized 1,410 regular building permits in 2017 in addition to 93 Class K permits, the latter accounting for approximately 7 percent of the total permits.

According to a memo from the department of Planning and Building Services, and a legal opinion presented to the board by Deputy County Counsel Matthew Kiedrowski, recommendations from staff and the Public Health, Safety and Resources Committee included: the recommendation to amend the time required for the county to establish and enforce regulations for recording of information regarding the materials, methods of construction, alternative facilities and other factors of value in the full disclosure of the nature of the dwellings from one year to three.

There are few guidelines in state or county regulations on proposed penalties against people who build structures as an owner-builder and immediately turn around and sell the property, according to Kiedrowski.

He said the committee talked about extending the period under the current ordinance and adding a three-year deed restriction requirement.

Although language was put into the draft ordinance, Kiedrowski said he wanted to note there is probably some legal difficulties in enforcing such a restriction.

“Our recommendation might be to simply stick with the requirement of recording something on a property so people are well aware this was built under Class K and they should investigate that,” he said.

Supervisor Georgeanne Croskey said she did not see why the change in the time frame would make a significant difference if the county was not seeing an uptick in properties being built and sold by pseudo developers.

“The point of Class K originally was so people could build a small home for themselves,” she said and added county officials are trying to make sure that is still the case.

Supervisor John McCowen said he thought the change from one year to three would serve the purpose of discouraging speculation and abuse of the ordinance’s intended purposes.

Another change discussed by the board is a provision that Class K houses be limited to 2,000 square feet of habitable space, with an allowance for an addition of an attached accessory unit.

The staff memo outlined committee discussions at several meetings last year regarding whether to place a limit on the size of a house that may be constructed pursuant to the ordinance, with the final direction given to establish the 2,000-square-feet limit or the entire footage within the single family residence.

“If we set the limit as so proposed, we are less likely to see an abuse of the Class K ordinance,” said Oliphant. “Just to omit from some of the things that are required in here. That’s why there is a 2,000-square-footage limitation.”

Interim Planning and Building department director Nash Gonzalez said the idea is to prevent the abuse, because officials have heard that Class K is being abused to create mansions, when the idea was to limit the square footage.

“As I recall, Class K was really established to provide an avenue for those buildings, those structures that could not qualify under the uniform building code back in the 1980s,” he said. “I would say if we look back at the ’80s, that is what people were looking at.”

Gonzalez added that he heard recently that Class K is being abused and not being used for the rural dwellings it was intended for.

Other proposed amendments to the ordinance include requiring a one-acre minimum parcel size for all new Class K dwellings, and requiring the Wildland Urban Interface standards for all new single-family residences, and requirements related to fire sprinklers in dwellings of a specific size, a proposal which proved to be unpopular with a number of residents and community members.

The documentation reviewed by the supervisors notes the proposed parcel size requirement limits rural to mean areas of the unincorporated county designated and zoned for one-acre minimums or larger acre minimums.

According to the staff memo, the committee directed that fire sprinklers should only be required in dwellings greater than 1,250 square feet and on parcels of one acre in size, but not on larger parcels.

Oliphant said after further research and considering best practices for the county, because the current edition of the residential code in the context of Class K specifically allows foundations other than perimeter foundations, the building division is no longer recommending this as a requirement.

County resident Stephanie Gold during the public hearing on the issue said she would recommend the county do away with the fire sprinkler requirements.

“People could still install them if they wish,” she said and added there is no national consensus that sprinklers should be required in new homes. She said 31 states enacted legislation that prohibit requiring fire sprinklers.